A short summary of my argument that using ChatGPT isn't bad for the environment

Andy Masley

SubscribeSign in

AI & the Environment<br>A short summary of my argument that using ChatGPT isn't bad for the environment<br>To share with anyone still worried

Andy Masley<br>Nov 12, 2025

125

22<br>19

Share

A few months ago I had compiled my core argument that it’s completely, conclusively ridiculous to worry about the environmental impacts of your personal chatbot prompts into a short summary people could share with skeptical people, without them having to read all of my two super long posts. I added it to one of the massive long posts, but I realized it might have gotten buried there, so I’m posting it here to make it easier to share. If you’d like to go much deeper on any of the arguments, explore this post. If you don’t see me addressing an argument you think is important, see if I addressed it here. If your main concern is AI more broadly, I can’t address every last environmental objection to all AI products in one post. I’ve written about the topic a lot in general here.<br>In the past few months I’ve spoken to a lot of people facing objections to using chatbots, including a surprising number of people who want to buy chatbot access for their large organizations and have been shot down because of worry over the environmental impact of individual prompts. I think it’s crazy that this is still happening and want a much shorter post readers can send to people who are still misinformed about this. Here it is!<br>Using ChatGPT isn’t bad for the environment

How I got the ChatGPT number. Original graph from Founders’ Pledge. The ChatGPT number also includes the cost of training, the embodied emissions of the AI hardware, the energy used by idling chips, and the cost of transmitting the data to your device.<br>Using chatbots emits the same tiny amounts of CO2 as other normal things we do online, and way less than most offline things we do. Even when you include “hidden costs” like training, the emissions from making hardware, energy used in cooling, and AI chips idling between prompts, the carbon cost of an average chatbot prompt adds up to less than 1/150,000th of the average American’s daily emissions. Water is similar. Everything we do uses a lot of water. Most electricity is generated using water, and most of the way AI “uses” water is actually just in generating its electricity. The average American’s daily water footprint is ~800,000 times as much as the full cost of an AI prompt. The actual amount of water used per prompt in data centers themselves is vanishingly small.<br>Because chatbot prompts use so little energy and water, if you’re sitting and reading the full responses they generate, it’s very likely that you’re using way less energy and water than you otherwise would in your daily life. It takes ~1000 prompts to raise your emissions by 1%. If we assume each response is ~100 words, and you read at the speed an average American does, and writing the prompts and waiting for the response took you no time, it would take you 6 hours and 30 minutes to read all the responses. So you would use half your waking day on an app that in total caused 1% of your emissions. If you sat at your computer all day, sending and reading 1000 prompts in a row, you wouldn’t be doing more energy intensive things like driving, or using physical objects you own that wear out, need to be replaced, and cost emissions and water to make. Every second you spend walking outside wears out your sneakers just a little bit, to the point that they eventually need to be replaced. Sneakers cost water to make. My best guess is that every second of walking uses as much water in expectation as ~7 chatbot prompts. So sitting inside at your computer saves that water too. It seems like it’s near impossible to raise your personal emissions and water footprint at all using chatbots, because using all day on something that ends up causing 1% of your normal emissions is exactly like spending all day on an activity that costs only 1% of the money you normally spend.<br>Different models use different amounts of energy and water. To see current estimates, you can look at EcoLogits’ list here. For each, compare it to your total emissions (you can estimate your emissions using my calculator here) and see how many prompts it would take you to raise your emissions by 1%.<br>There are no other situations, anywhere, where we worry about amounts of energy and water this small. I can’t find any other places where people have gotten worried about things they do that use such tiny amounts of energy. Chatbot energy and water use being a problem is a really bizarre meme that has taken hold, I think mostly because people are surprised that chatbots are being used by so many people that on net their total energy and water use is noticeable. Being “mindful” with your chatbot usage is kind of like filling a large pot of water to boil to make food, and before boiling it, taking a pipet and...